Do we have the right to tax people in order to help the poor?

[Ned]

I perceive Canada as being much more social and affording to their disadvantaged citizens than America.

Your perception is correct.

What does you book business consist of?

We have an inventory of over 10,000 used books in excellent near new condition (most of them). We have been selling them world wide for over 9 years now. Mostly non-fiction in every possible discipline, but we have some fiction and a lot of children's fiction. Take a look at http://www.montland.ca

[Skip]

It was an ethical question, not a legal one. The mechanism of legislation, laws, constitution, etc. are irrelevant to this thread.

But it's government that does the taxing. What kind of government we live under seems relevant to how we perceive its central functions. I very much doubt anyone here can separate out their attitudes to paying taxes and what those taxes are used for from their attitude to governance in general and the economic policies of own nation in particular. But, okay.

1./ How do you feel about someone forcing you (by enacting tax laws) to help others you never met?

Fine. I think it's their responsibility, my obligation and the recipients' right. Acquaintanceship doesn't come into ethics.

2./ If you think some force is justified, on what principle should the magnitude/extent of this force be based on (or you go along with arbitrarily selected limits) ?

If I can't cite the constitution which already exists, then the principle would have to be arrived-at by a consensus or majority decision of my fellow citizens. If I were dictator and had to make the decision alone, I would still consult an advisory council.


My question about poverty was relevant to the proper disposition of revenues collected. Other people got to mention armaments; I should be allowed to ask about trade schools and public housing.

[Dalek Prime]

People already pay taxes to help all sorts of groups they do not belong to. I am not a parent, yet I find it acceptable to help with education. I am not a driver, yet it is acceptable for general transportation and roads. And while I do not agree with corporate welfare, we all have given money to them, including through tax breaks, another form of giving. And if people don't have money to spend, all suffer, from local businesses to big business.

A right? Damn right.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.





Wow...That is a REALLY nice website.


Honestly, I don't read much anymore or I would order some.


Both of you are attractive and you look like a really nice couple.


I like the way an individual can click-on one of the post-it notes at the top to be directed to your links.



Good luck to you & your enterprise.







.

[Dalek Prime]

I second that. Well done, Ned. Best wishes.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

no, we have no right, we have obligation to pay taxes, there's a huge difference

Interesting perspective.

lol in fact we have no right to tax anyone, the only right we have, is to be taxed. I mean if we could choose, shall we decide to pay taxes for whatever reason that could be? Shall we have such a noble behaviour? I think if we were to choose, anyone would have their own justified reasons to avoid to pay taxes in order to help whoever they could be, that's the reason why paying taxes is not a right of ours, that's an obligation, a civil obligation. If it was a right, many would "kindly" decline. Paying taxes is seen by most taxpayers as an advantage of their own, for example for their retirement pension, rather than a help for indigent people. My opinion.

Well said. 'Libertarians' would like us to go back to the days of begging in the streets and sending people to the workhouse to die.

[Ned]

Thank you Bill, Dalek!

Let me approach the subject of the thread from a different angle:

How would you reply to Ay Rand's argument I quoted in my second post on this thread:

"No one has the right to force another human being to do anything against his/her own (perceived) self interest. If we allow a human being to ‘initiate’ force against another, to force him act against his/her interests, then we have approved of dictatorships of the worst kind. This applies to forcing others to act on your compassion"

Many decades ago, when I was young and stupid, I believed this to be correct. It took me many years of learning to see why it wasn't.

I am sort of curious how you would answer that argument now.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

.







Both of you are attractive and you look like a really nice couple.












.

Looks can be deceiving.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Who care's what Ayn Rand said? She was a bitch.

[Melchior]

This topic is closely related to the other thread under discussion right now: “Do we owe each other anything?”

Well, I am biased on this issue, because I am one of the poor and live on a very modest government pension. We are listed way under the poverty line and, without the extra income from our small online book business, we would barely manage.

I keep hearing more and more often from every direction that we the baby-boomers (the aging population) will break the bank and make younger people pay higher taxes, as if we had not raised them, put them through school, started them in life AND paid a lot of taxes ourselves into our healthcare and pension system, the money which is being gambled away in questionable mutual funds and undefined derivatives by our leaders. However, 16 billion for fighter planes and 1.2 Billion for pointless 2-day Gxx meetings (in Canada) are, apparently, affordable.

So, my question is: should bleeding-heart-liberals be allowed to FORCE others (by enacting progressive tax laws) to help those who need help?

No.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.


Bernie Sanders Exposes 18 CEOs who took Trillions in Bailouts, Evaded Taxes and Outsourced Jobs




Several of the companies received a total taxpayer bailout of more than $2.5 trillion from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department.

Many of the companies also have outsourced hundreds of thousands of American jobs to China and other low wage countries, forcing their workers to receive unemployment insurance and other federal benefits. In other words, these are some of the same people who have significantly caused the deficit to explode over the last four years.

Here are the 18 CEO’s Sanders labeled job destroyers in his report. (All data from Top Corporate Dodgers report.)

1). 1. Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan
Amount of federal income taxes paid in 2010? Zero. $1.9 billion tax refund.
Taxpayer Bailout from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department? Over $1.3 trillion.
Amount of federal income taxes Bank of America would have owed if offshore tax havens were eliminated? $2.6 billion.

2). Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein
Amount of federal income taxes paid in 2008? Zero. $278 million tax refund.
Taxpayer Bailout from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department? $824 billion.
Amount of federal income taxes Goldman Sachs would have owed if offshore tax havens were eliminated? $2.7 billion

3). JP Morgan Chase CEO James Dimon
Taxpayer Bailout from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department? $416 billion.
Amount of federal income taxes JP Morgan Chase would have owed if offshore tax havens were eliminated? $4.9 billion.

4). General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt
Amount of federal income taxes paid in 2010? Zero. $3.3 billion tax refund.
Taxpayer Bailout from the Federal Reserve? $16 billion.
Jobs Shipped Overseas? At least 25,000 since 2001.

5). Verizon CEO Lowell McAdam
Amount of federal income taxes paid in 2010? Zero. $705 million tax refund.
American Jobs Cut in 2010? In 2010, Verizon announced 13,000 job cuts, the third highest corporate layoff total that year.

6). Boeing CEO James McNerney, Jr.
Amount of federal income taxes paid in 2010? None. $124 million tax refund.
American Jobs Shipped overseas? Over 57,000.
Amount of Corporate Welfare? At least $58 billion.

7). Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer
Amount of federal income taxes Microsoft would have owed if offshore tax havens were eliminated? $19.4 billion.

. Honeywell International CEO David Cote
Amount of federal income taxes paid from 2008-2010? Zero. $34 million tax refund.

9). Corning CEO Wendell Weeks
Amount of federal income taxes paid from 2008-2010? Zero. $4 million tax refund.

10). Time Warner CEO Glenn Britt
Amount of federal income taxes paid in 2008? Zero. $74 million tax refund.

11). Merck CEO Kenneth Frazier
Amount of federal income taxes paid in 2009? Zero. $55 million tax refund.

12). Deere & Company CEO Samuel Allen
Amount of federal income taxes paid in 2009? Zero. $1 million tax refund.

13). Marsh & McLennan Companies CEO Brian Duperreault
Amount of federal income taxes paid in 2010? Zero. $90 million refund.

14). Qualcomm CEO Paul Jacobs
Amount of federal income taxes Qualcomm would have owed if offshore tax havens were eliminated? $4.7 billion.

15). Tenneco CEO Gregg Sherill
Amount of federal income taxes Tenneco would have owed if offshore tax havens were eliminated? $269 million.

16). Express Scripts CEO George Paz
Amount of federal income taxes Express Scripts would have owed if offshore tax havens were eliminated? $20 million.

17). Caesars Entertainment CEO Gary Loveman
Amount of federal income taxes Caesars Entertainment would have owed if offshore tax havens were eliminated? $9 million.

18). R.R. Donnelly & Sons CEO Thomas Quinlan III
Amount of federal income taxes paid in 2008? Zero. $49 million tax refund.
Eighteen of the 80 CEOs who signed the call for deficit action are actually some of the biggest outsourcers and tax cheats in America. First, they crashed the economy in 2008. They followed that up by taking billions in taxpayer bailout dollars. Their next step was to outsource jobs and evade taxes. Now they are calling for action on a deficit that they helped create over the past four years.
Bernie Sanders is exposing the hypocrisy of these CEOs, and every American should understand that if Mitt Romney is elected president, these pigs see potential for unlimited feeding from the taxpayer trough. Only by standing together can we tell these CEOs that the bill has come due, and it is time for them to pay.
We can tell these gluttons of our dollars that the all you can eat taxpayer buffet is now closed.





.

[Dalek Prime]

Thank you Bill, Dalek!

Let me approach the subject of the thread from a different angle:

How would you reply to Ay Rand's argument I quoted in my second post on this thread:

"No one has the right to force another human being to do anything against his/her own (perceived) self interest. If we allow a human being to ‘initiate’ force against another, to force him act against his/her interests, then we have approved of dictatorships of the worst kind. This applies to forcing others to act on your compassion"

Many decades ago, when I was young and stupid, I believed this to be correct. It took me many years of learning to see why it wasn't.

I am sort of curious how you would answer that argument now.

As I said, Ayn Rand lived on social assistance in her later years. Her own philosophy failed her.... If we owe nothing to society, why should we have one at all. Other people die to defend a country, and some whine about putting up some cash? Really?

[Ned]

As I said, Ayn Rand lived on social assistance in her later years. Her own philosophy failed her.... If we owe nothing to society, why should we have one at all.

Dalek, forget about Ayn Rand for a minute.

Pretend that you heard it from a total stranger who believed it to be true. This stranger is a really nice person and sincerely believes that it is morally wrong to force anyone to act against their own interest. He is contributing to all kinds of charity, voluntarily, but bridles at the thought of being forced to do so.

What would you tell him?

[Skip]

Let me approach the subject of the thread from a different angle:

How would you reply to Ayn Rand's argument I quoted in my second post on this thread:
"No one has the right to force another human being to do anything against his/her own (perceived) self interest. If we allow a human being to ‘initiate’ force against another, to force him act against his/her interests, then we have approved of dictatorships of the worst kind. This applies to forcing others to act on your compassion"

All right. Let's parse it.

No one has the right to force another human being to do anything against his/her own (---) self interest.

On what grounds? There has never been a society that didn't put the collective interest above individual self-interest. Had there been one, it wouldn't have lasted two generations. In every society, there is a large measure of willing participation, voluntary curbing of short-term gain for long-term security and mutual defence, but there has also been a degree of dissent and resistance on the part of some individuals, which must be overcome by force on behalf of the group. This force is usually called police.

If you put (perceived) back in, the sentence turns nonsensical: it outlaws parenting, education, traffic laws, urban zoning, anti-pollution measures, food inspection, fire safety regulation and the collection of debts, as well as law enforcement. It also assumes that every person is fully cognizant of their self-interest in all its implications and projections. I posit that this is not the case.

If we allow a human being to ‘initiate’ force against another, to force him to act against his/her interests, then we have approved of dictatorships of the worst kind.

If tax collection is the worst kind of dictatorship, what are the better kinds? Or, put another way, what are the exact boundaries between legitimate government and dictatorship?

This applies to forcing others to act on your compassion

Should the collective have no powers at all to protect the weak against the strong?
The state doesn't enforce compassion; it enforces a standard of conditions acceptable to its citizens. Sweat shops were outlawed when the majority of citizens objected to child labour; tenements are not yet outlawed, because the majority do not object.

Ayn Rand and her followers have a poor grasp of social contract

[Dalek Prime]

As I said, Ayn Rand lived on social assistance in her later years. Her own philosophy failed her.... If we owe nothing to society, why should we have one at all.

Dalek, forget about Ayn Rand for a minute.

Pretend that you heard it from a total stranger who believed it to be true. This stranger is a really nice person and sincerely believes that it is morally wrong to force anyone to act against their own interest. He is contributing to all kinds of charity, voluntarily, but bridles at the thought of being forced to do so.

What would you tell him?

I'd ask him if he has a problem paying for things like roads and education. I don't, and don't use it like others. So he should support me and everyone else who is forced to, though he may use it. He can't have it both ways. If you take, you give back. And if you don't, get of our roads.